News on Meghan and Harry

[Viviennemary]

Since they are in the news more or less daily why not a thread on this. Latest I've read over the last few days is that Meghan is going to produce a film from a book. And later this month she is teaming up with Michelle Obama for project on gender equality. Both sound interesting projects.

AroseinHarlem . 👏

Personally I don't see the problem with cosmetic enhancements - I don't think there are many women in the public eye who don't dabble with botox/fillers etc. I am not in the public eye but have botox etc because I prefer how I look with it, doesn't make me any less of a feminist.

I think MM is in a difficult position. Obviously she only gets the invites to speak now because of whom she married but what should she do? Am sure she is trying to utilise her power/influence to the best of her ability.

Personally, I find Harry a lot more problematic. MM has undoubtedly encountered racism and sexism where as Harry has had one of the most privileged upbringing/education of any person on this planet and yet . . .

I think it's really hard to have any honest discussion or debate if only certain viewpoints are tolerated. The hypersensitivity towards posts that are critical of certain people and the overzealous deletions show an uncomfortable degree of bias.

Completely agree with your post, @ARoseInHarlem.

Also, it's assumed MM was invited to participate. It's just as likely she put herself forward for it. So as far as the organisation is concerned her involvement might be more about the publicity she brings than the content of her message.

I really really think it is wrong to criticise her looks, why just why do that, Rose?
Your original post came from the heart, that much is obvious, but having a dig at extensions, nails, lips, make up just reduces your post to unwarranted criticism and takes away from the message that is important to you. As does calling Harry thick. So what if he's only got 2 A levels, more than me, I left school at 15 with nothing, doesn't make me less of a person.

I have adult DDs, neither of them would dream of thinking they had to plump up their lips or use contouring to get anywhere in the world, they'd prefer to listen to the message that is being said by that person. I don't like the botox/enhanced look personally but probably because I need polyfilla and a trowel at my age

I always read your posts in full Rose because whilst I might not agree with all you say, they are insightful and informative. I suppose I was just disappointed with what you said last night. Muzzling Meghan is not on. Everyone has a voice, if she wants to use hers for female empowerment, she can, and a lot of young girls appreciate what she has to say.

Also, it's assumed MM was invited to participate. It's just as likely she put herself forward for it. So as far as the organisation is concerned her involvement might be more about the publicity she brings than the content of her message

Is this like when she gatecrashed the graduation ceremony of her old school?!
I am sure the organisation could have said 'no' if they'd wanted. I think it's wrong to suggest this again.

Rose, as a longtime lurker on these threads, may I just say that I have always appreciated your eloquent and insightful posts. Your latest is just the same, and all the more powerful for the way you have spoken from the heart.

I also hope that you will not be deleted or suspended but I can't be confident about that. Please know, therefore, that I send you my best wishes and that you have my utmost respect.

Thank you Rose. You always write very long and thoughtful posts and I really enjoy reading them - even if I don’t always agree.

I must say, I do find it very uncomfortable when white posters call POC racist. As Rose so eloquently put it, there are so many layers to this and I am still trying to get a better understanding of all arguments. However, as a white poster, I would never presume to lecture a POC on racism and I am surprised that anyone is comfortable with this - it has happened before as well.

I have no problem at all with whatever beauty enhancements anyone chooses to make. Meghan is absolutely gorgeous in my opinion and I actually never thought about what enhancements she might have had, except for clever makeup.

However, as a mum of two girls under 12, I am very aware of how society is trying to make them conform to it’s perceived view of femininity and I do worry about makeup, nail polish and indeed hair extensions being marketed at girls who when they are in their teens already are trying to figure out who they are and how to make sense of the world.

I haven’t watched the video, but as I understand Rose’s basic message is that she wanted less of a focus on appearance, less of a focus on who you marry and more of a focus on what your achievements and interests are, I must say that is something I would agree with.

Another lurker breaking ranks to say I've been really disappointed with the link MNHQ have been taking to some posts here - especially posts from @ARoseInHarlem which are always superb.

Whilst I'm breaking rank, it seems to me that posters on one side aren't saying MM shouldn't be saying the things she's saying, they're questioning whether she was appropriately qualified to be included in the event in the first place, given that her 'fame' is 99% based on marrying into one of the most unequal, misogynistic institutions imaginable.... which then leads to questions about how feminist is it to use a title you only have through marriage? How feminist is it to give up everything you've worked for to be your husband's sidekick within a hugely unequal and misogynistic institution? Etc etc. The posters on the other side appear to be reacting as if the criticisms are that MM shouldn't be saying what she does, which isn't how it reads to me at all.

The discussion around appearance and cosmetic surgery etc is interesting - it's all on a scale from no make up to plastic surgery etc. It's where your own personal 'acceptable-ness' point is on that scale. For me, I'd be heartbroken if my DD chose an industry based on her conforming to a certain 'look' and then had procedures to further that conformity. I seriously question where we went wrong in instilling in her a good sense of self worth and a critical view of women's place in the world. It's this that I suspect is what's driving the mention of appearance, with inclusion in a feminist event. For some women, the two don't sit together at all.

but as I understand Rose’s basic message is that she wanted less of a focus on appearance, less of a focus on who you marry and more of a focus on what your achievements and interests are, I must say that is something I would agree with.

That is how I understood it too.

ARoseInHarlem another brilliant post. Thank you

@meercat23

but as I understand Rose’s basic message is that she wanted less of a focus on appearance, less of a focus on who you marry and more of a focus on what your achievements and interests are, I must say that is something I would agree with.

That is how I understood it too.

If you think there should be less focus on appearance, why open your post with bitching about another woman's appearance?

I don't know why cosmetic enhancement would be seen as a bad thing. As if to suggest somebody who has it has done something wrong. I haven't had it myself though I have thought about it. I'd be too scared it went wrong.

Why can't we post about Meghan's appearance? I have seen many threads discussing other people's appearance.

For Mumsnet to throw the racist card at posts is a cop out. They don't know how I look. They don't know my background so how can they say that I am being racist if I say that I don't like Meghan's hair or how she dresses or even how she behaves.

Let's be honest here. If anyone dared to criticise anything about Kate's appearance, they would be flamed like nothing else.
But because it's MM, anything goes.
I just hate the unfairness of it.

It's this that I suspect is what's driving the mention of appearance, with inclusion in a feminist event. For some women, the two don't sit together at all
Yes, but.... did posters look at all the speakers at this event checking out their lips, hair, makeup? No. Just MM. There are enough sticks to beat her with, without this particular one

I think most feminists (which I'm assuming everyone on this thread is) would agree that the focus on a presenter at a girls' empowerment event should be on content not appearance.

So why pass judgement (and it was judelgement) on her appearance? I don't think it's helpful.

It distracts from the real issue - which is the drivel and the invitation in the first place.

@Roussette Kate's appearance is criticised loads on mn. She is too thin, too wrinkly, her hair too full etc etc - have just read her voice is too posh as well!

All the women get criticised in the RF.

I think it's really hard to have any honest discussion or debate if only certain viewpoints are tolerated. The hypersensitivity towards posts that are critical of certain people and the overzealous deletions show an uncomfortable degree of bias

I agree completely, but then I respect everyone's right to an opinion as long as it's not obviously hateful. That includes the right to their views of those who don't feel the same way - but not the ability to shut down others

A shame, really, that some are being enabled to do exactly that

I haven't seen any videos of any of the other speakers. I don't see why commenting on appearances saying we prefer this hairstyle of that could be in any way not acceptable. When appearance is important to a person it tends to become important to observers too IMHO.

[quote mrscampbellblackagain]@Roussette Kate's appearance is criticised loads on mn. She is too thin, too wrinkly, her hair too full etc etc - have just read her voice is too posh as well!

All the women get criticised in the RF.[/quote]
and that is wrong. yet people are congratulating a poster on a post where she does that.
so what if M had a nose job.
why use it as a way to drag her down.

I agree completely, but then I respect everyone's right to an opinion as long as it's not obviously hateful. That includes the right to their views of those who don't feel the same way - but not the ability to shut down others

Agreed, I can't relate to the mindset that seeks to censor dissenting opinions, it's such a slippery slope. I somehow doubt that Michelle Obama and some of the other speakers at the summit would disagree with Rose's posts.